• Energy Research

Decarbonising the power system contributes to carbon emission reductions and synergetic air pollution reductions, but these co-benefits may be unevenly distributed across regions. These distributional consequences from national policies may lead to conflict of interests at subnational levels, which has often been overlooked. This study assesses provincial economic impacts and synergetic air pollutant reductions of power system decarbonisation in China, achieved by two different national policies, namely a mandatory phaseout policy and an Emissions Trading System (ETS). To this end, a multi-regional dynamic Computable General Equilibrium (CGE) model is developed and adopted. The scenario analysis shows that the mandatory phaseout policy is more effective in reducing air pollutant emissions from the power sector, while leading to greater GDP losses at the national level. At provincial levels, the ETS mitigates the trade-off between economic growth and air pollutant reductions, but the mandatory phaseout policy would be more favourable to the majority of provinces no matter whether the GDP growth or air pollution reduction is prioritised.

AbstractGlobal biomass demand is expected to roughly double between 2005 and 2050. Current studies suggest that agricultural intensification through optimally managed crops on today’s cropland alone is insufficient to satisfy future demand. In practice though, improving crop growth management through better technology and knowledge almost inevitably goes along with (1) improving farm management with increased cropping intensity and more annual harvests where feasible and (2) an economically more efficient spatial allocation of crops which maximizes farmers’ profit. By explicitly considering these two factors we show that, without expansion of cropland, today’s global biomass potentials substantially exceed previous estimates and even 2050s’ demands. We attribute 39% increase in estimated global production potentials to increasing cropping intensities and 30% to the spatial reallocation of crops to their profit-maximizing locations. The additional potentials would make cropland expansion redundant. Their geographic distribution points at possible hotspots for future intensification.

Two possible adaptation scenarios to climate change for Sub-Saharan Africa are analyzed under the SRES B2 scenario. The first scenario doubles the irrigated area in Sub-Saharan Africa by 2050, compared to the baseline, but keeps total crop area constant. The second scenario increases both rainfed and irrigated crop yields by 25% for all Sub-Saharan African countries. The two adaptation scenarios are analyzed with IMPACT, a partial equilibrium agricultural sector model combined with a water simulation module, and with GTAP-W, a general equilibrium model including water resources. The methodology combines the advantages of a partial equilibrium approach, which considers detailed water-agriculture linkages, with a general equilibrium approach, which takes into account linkages between agriculture and nonagricultural sectors and includes a full treatment of factor markets. The efficacy of the two scenarios as adaptation measures to cope with climate change is discussed. Due to the limited initial irrigated area in the region, an increase in agricultural productivity achieves better outcomes than an expansion of irrigated area. Even though Sub-Saharan Africa is not a key contributor to global food production (rainfed, irrigated or total), both scenarios help lower world food prices, stimulating national and international food markets.

AbstractFinance is vital for the green energy transition, but access to low cost finance is uneven as the cost of capital differs substantially between regions. This study shows how modelled decarbonisation pathways for developing economies are disproportionately impacted by different weighted average cost of capital (WACC) assumptions. For example, representing regionally-specific WACC values indicates 35% lower green electricity production in Africa for a cost-optimal 2 °C pathway than when regional considerations are ignored. Moreover, policy interventions lowering WACC values for low-carbon and high-carbon technologies by 2050 would allow Africa to reach net-zero emissions approximately 10 years earlier than when the cost of capital reduction is not considered. A climate investment trap arises for developing economies when climate-related investments remain chronically insufficient. Current finance frameworks present barriers to these finance flows and radical changes are needed so that capital is more equitably distributed.

Based on predicted changes in the magnitude and distribution of global precipitation, temperature and river flow under the IPCC SRES A1B and A2 scenarios, this study assesses the potential impacts of climate change and CO2 fertilization on global agriculture. The analysis uses the new version of the GTAP-W model, which distinguishes between rainfed and irrigated agriculture and implements water as an explicit factor of production for irrigated agriculture. Future climate change is likely to modify regional water endowments and soil moisture. As a consequence, the distribution of harvested land will change, modifying production and international trade patterns. The results suggest that a partial analysis of the main factors through which climate change will affect agricultural productivity provide a false appreciation of the nature of changes likely to occur. Our results show that global food production, welfare and GDP fall in the two time periods and SRES scenarios. Higher food prices are expected. No matter which SRES scenario is preferred, we find that the expected losses in welfare are significant. These losses are slightly larger under the SRES A2 scenario for the 2020s and under the SRES A1B scenario for the 2050s. The results show that national welfare is influenced both by regional climate change and climate-induced changes in competitiveness.

Abstract Environmental policies often underperform due to so-called rebound effects, namely behavioural and systemic responses to technical change leading to additional consumption and environmental damage. While evidence of rebound is abundant, studies generally focus on technical changes that are neither associated with specific technologies nor their production costs, making it difficult to connect these changes with the policies governing them. To overcome this limitation, this study proposes to combine a technology-rich model based on life cycle assessment and a behaviour-optimising model for the global economy based on computable general equilibrium modelling. This approach allows to quantify policy-induced economy-wide rebound effects for four relevant environmental impacts: climate change, acidification, photochemical ozone formation, and particulate matter. We apply this approach to evaluate the effectiveness of the United Kingdom’s subsidy on electric cars. The results show notable economy-wide rebound effects associated with this subsidy: over or close to 100% (no environmental benefits) for acidification and particulate matter impacts, and a lower, yet notable, magnitude for climate change (~20–50%) and photochemical ozone formation (~30–80%) impacts. The results also show the important role of macro-economic effects from price changes, particularly how the shift from petrol to electricity triggered additional demand for cheaper petrol.

Technological breakthroughs and policy measures targeting energy efficiency and clean energy alone will not suffice to deliver Paris Agreement-compliant greenhouse gas emissions trajectories in the next decades. Strong cases have recently been made for acknowledging the decarbonisation potential lying in transforming linear economic models into closed-loop industrial ecosystems and in shifting lifestyle patterns towards this direction. This perspective highlights the research capacity needed to inform on the role and potential of the circular economy for climate change mitigation and to enhance the scientific capabilities to quantitatively explore their synergies and trade-offs. This begins with establishing conceptual and methodological bridges amongst the relevant and currently fragmented research communities, thereby allowing an interdisciplinary integration and assessment of circularity, decarbonisation, and sustainable development. Following similar calls for science in support of climate action, a transdisciplinary scientific agenda is needed to co-create the goals and scientific processes underpinning the transition pathways towards a circular, net-zero economy with representatives from policy, industry, and civil society. Here, it is argued that such integration of disciplines, methods, and communities can then lead to new and/or structurally enhanced quantitative systems models that better represent critical industrial value chains, consumption patterns, and mitigation technologies. This will be a crucial advancement towards assessing the material implications of, and the contribution of enhanced circularity performance to, mitigation pathways that are compatible with the temperature goals of the Paris Agreement and the transition to a circular economy. © 2021 The Authors This work was supported by the H2020 European Commis- sion projects “PARIS REINFORCE”(Grant Agreement No. 820846), “LOCOMOTION”(Grant Agreement No. 821105), “NDC ASPECTS”(Grant Agreement No. 101003866), and “newTRENDS”(Grant Agreement No. 893311); the European Research Council (ERC) project “FINEPRINT”(Grant Agreement No. 725525); the Hel- lenic Foundation for Research and Innovation (HFRI) and General Secretariat for Research and Technology (GSRT) project “ATOM”(Grant Agreement No. HFRI-FM17–2566); the Spanish Ministry of Science, Innovation, and Universities projects RTI2018–099858- A-I00 and RTI2018–093352-B-I00; the María de Maeztu excel- lence accreditation 2018–2022 (Ref. MDM-2017–0714), funded by MCIN/AEI/10.13039/50110 0 011033; and by the Basque Government through the BERC 2018–2021 program and BIDERATU project (KK- 2021/0 0 050, ELKARTEK programme 2021). The sole responsibility for the content of this paper lies with the authors; the paper does not necessarily reflect the opinions of the European Commission, the Basque Government, or the Spanish Government.